20181638 Ver 3_Southgate 401 Comment Letter_20191220

625 Liberty Avenue, Suite 1700 | Pittsburgh, PA 15222
833-MV-SOUTH | [e-mail]
www.mvpsouthgate.com

December 20, 2019

NC Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Attn: Ms. Sue Homewood
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617

RE: MVP Southgate Project – WRITTEN COMMENTS
Public Notice dated October 18, 2019 & Public Hearing held on November 19, 2019.

401 Water Quality Certification Application - DWR # 20181638

Dear Ms. Homewood:

Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC (“Mountain Valley”) appreciates the opportunity to provide these written
comments and additional information in support of the above-referenced N.C. Division of Water
Resources (DWR) 401 Water Quality Certification application for the MVP Southgate Project (“Project”).
Specifically, the Project is providing preliminary responses to public comments made during the public
hearing held on November 19, 2019 regarding the above-referenced application.

While we believe the majority of the public comments made during the hearing were not directly
applicable to the areas subject to review under 15A NCAC 02H .0500, there were several concerns
raised regarding the Project’s purpose and need, potential direct and indirect impacts to water quality,
and potential impacts to drinking water wells, and stream buffers. To aid the DWR in its review of these
comments, Mountain Valley is providing the following responses on behalf of the Project:

Public Comments & Project Responses

Public Comment: The project does not have a strong enough purpose & need.

Project Response: The Project’s purpose and need is subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC). An application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
(Certificate), which included an exhaustive analysis of the Project’s purpose and need, was filed with the
FERC in November 2018 and included in the Joint Permit Application (JPA). As the lead federal agency,
FERC is in the process of reviewing the information submitted by the Project and will make the sole
determination as to whether the Project’s purpose and need is sufficient to warrant the issuance of a
Certificate.

The North Carolina Utilities Commission (NCUC) regulates public utilities in North Carolina, including
local gas distribution companies such as Dominion Energy North Carolina (DENC). The MVP Southgate
Project is being built to provide low-cost supply access to natural gas produced in the Marcellus and
Utica shale regions for service delivery to DENC (formerly known as PSNC Energy) customers, as well
as existing and new end-user markets in southern Virginia and central North Carolina. In 2018, DENC
demonstrated to the NCUC that MVP Southgate offers the best-cost option for providing the natural gas
that its customers demand. DENC’s application included both public and nonpublic confidential data,
which allowed for a full and thorough analysis by NCUC. The NCUC approved DENC’s application and
is serving as a commenting party in the Project’s FERC proceeding.

Public Comment: There will be direct and indirect impacts to water quality of streams and
rivers along the project corridor.

Project Response: Although all direct and indirect impacts to streams and wetlands cannot be avoided,
that is not the purpose of the Clean Water Act § 401 certification; DWR’s obligation is to determine
whether there is reasonable assurance that the Project will be constructed and operated in a manner
that will not violate applicable state water quality standards. To fulfill this obligation, DWR is entitled to
rely on any information “relevant to water quality considerations.” 40 C.F.R. § 121.(a)(3). More
specifically, DWR is entitled to rely on the collective efforts of other federal and state agencies (including
its counterparts in the Department of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources (DEMLR)), acting within their
respective jurisdictions, to study the Project impacts and impose reasonable and prudent conditions that
will minimize water quality impacts below a level of significance. As summarized below, the
environmental reviews and requirements imposed by FERC, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE), and DEMLR—and which may be supplemented by conditions in DWR’s 401 certification—are
more than adequate to provide reasonable assurance that North Carolina’s water quality standards will
be protected. Sierra Club v. State Water Control Board, 898 F.3d 383, 404–05 & n,14 (4th Cir. 2018)
(holding that a state agency may rely on compliance with other federal and state approvals to provide
reasonable assurance that construction and operation of a pipeline will not cause violations of water
quality standards).

The Project has been designed to avoid impacts to Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) to the maximum extent
practicable while still allowing for safe construction conditions. For WOTUS that cannot be avoided, the
Project will employ a FERC approved Project-specific Wetland and Waterbody Construction and
Mitigation Procedures and adhere to requirements imposed by the USACE under Clean Water Act § 404.
Crossings of WOTUS with flowing water at the time of construction will be completed with a dry crossing
technique (e.g. dam and pump, flume, bore) as described in the JPA.

As detailed within the JPA, appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented to minimize the
magnitude and duration of direct impacts associated with stream crossings. The Project will initiate
cleanup and restoration activities as soon as practicable following completion of each WOTUS crossing
(typically within 24 to 48 hours from the start of the crossing). The substrates (streams) and top layer of
soil (wetlands) of WOTUS impacted during construction will be segregated from other soils and will be
replaced as the uppermost layer of backfill in the trench once the pipeline is installed. Excavated
streambed material will be temporarily stockpiled in uplands to the extent practicable, and where not
practicable, will be placed on filter cloth or another semi-impervious surface. Original streambed material
will be used in reconstructing the post-construction streambed. Any riparian areas that are disturbed will
be restored to pre-construction or better conditions with native species. The specific restoration plans
are currently being developed and will provide greater detail. Original streambed and bank contours will
be re-established for surface water and groundwater flow, and mulch, jute thatching, or bonded fiber
blankets will be installed on the stream banks, which are preferential to plastic erosion control blankets
because they reduce wildlife entrapment and are biodegradable. Where the flume technique is used,
stream banks will be stabilized before removing the flume pipes and returning flow to the waterbody
channel. These measures were included in the JPA to comply with Southgate’s Wetland and Waterbody
Construction and Mitigation Procedures, the USACE’s general, specific, and regional conditions for
Nationwide Permit (NWP) 12, and DWR’s typical 401 certification requirements for NWP 12. Direct
impacts will be further minimized by adherence to relevant environmental conditions outlined in FERC’s
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), and which are expected to be incorporated in the Final EIS
and FERC Certificate.

Upland erosion and sediment control measures and other best management practices will be
implemented to protect WOTUS from indirect impacts. Seeding of disturbed stream approaches will be
completed in accordance with the Southgate Procedures after final grading. Where necessary, slope
breakers will be installed adjacent to stream banks to minimize the potential for erosion. Sediment
barriers, such as silt fence and/or straw bales will be maintained across the right-of-way until permanent
revegetation is established. Temporary equipment bridges will be removed following construction. The
system of upland erosion and sediment control measures will comply with a FERC approved Project
specific Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation, and Maintenance Plan, site-specific erosion and
sediment control plans approved by DEMLR, Jordan Lake buffer protection requirements (where
applicable), and additional measures to be incorporated into the FERC Certificate.

Compliance with the requirements noted above is ensured by FERC, USACE, NCDEQ, and other
authorities exercising their respective inspection and compliance powers. Furthermore, the Project will
provide construction management personnel and environmental inspectors (“EIs”) with the appropriate
environmental information/materials specific to the Project. The EIs will be:

• Responsible for monitoring and documenting compliance with all mitigation measures required
by the FERC’s Order, if issued, and any other grants, permits, certificates, or other authorizing
documents;
• Responsible for evaluating the construction contractor’s implementation of the environmental
mitigation measures required in the contract or any other authorizing document;
• Empowered to order correction of acts that violate the environmental conditions of the FERC's
Order, or any other authorizing document (e.g., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404
permit), including stop work authority;
• A full-time position, separate from all other activity inspectors; and
• Responsible for maintaining status reports and training records.

Public Comment: There will be potential impacts to drinking water wells as a result of
blasting and drilling.

Project Response: As a general matter, it must be emphasized that there is no causal connection
between the use of blasting or drilling and impacts to drinking water wells. Blasting and drilling are
activities that occur in areas of shallow bedrock—within feet of the ground surface. All trenching activities
involve the application of force to dislodge and remove spoil from the trench, whether that force be
applied mechanically (i.e., excavator, rock ripper, drill) or by controlled detonation. There is no rational
basis to suggest that these activities have greater potential to impact to drinking water wells than
trenching completed by other means—which is to say the potential for impacts to drinking water is
negligible.

Blasting and drilling techniques will be conducted per FERC guidance, which is expected to be made
enforceable by the FERC Certificate (DEIS 4-11), as well as compliance with any other applicable
federal, state, or local regulations. Blasting will be conducted in a manner to minimize possible impacts
on nearby water supply wells. Use of controlled blasting techniques will limit rock fracture to the
immediate vicinity of detonation along the trench line. All activities will occur within the approved
construction rights-of-way. Blasting will be conducted by highly trained contractors only.

Although blasting and drilling activities do not present a realistic threat of impacts to drinking water wells,
it bears reiterating that Mountain Valley has a robust program in place to identify and protect water supply
wells and springs along the Project route. The Project is completing surveys to identify water supply wells
and springs within 150 feet of the Southgate Project workspace areas. If any public or private water
supply well or spring is identified within 150 feet of the Southgate Project workspace areas during
construction, mitigation measures will be utilized to minimize potential impact as a result of the Project,
as described below. As additional survey access is obtained, the Project will continue to conduct surveys
to identify wells and springs within 150 feet of the workspace areas.

For public or private wells and springs identified within 150 feet of the construction works area, the Project
will clearly mark the wellhead or spring and surround it with silt fence and/or safety fence (if landowner
access is provided) as a precaution for construction equipment and activities. In the event that the water
resource is affected or a significant potential for impact arises, the Project will be responsible for notifying
the owner/operator of the well or spring. The Project will conduct pre-construction testing of all private
wells located within 150 feet of the construction workspace where landowners allow access. The wells
and springs will then be tested again after construction is complete.

The Project will evaluate landowner complaints or reported damage associated with construction. In the
unlikely event that a private well or spring is impacted by Project construction activities, the Project will
negotiate a settlement with the landowner that will include a temporary water supply to affected
homeowners while their well is repaired or replaced. If an impact occurs to a livestock well or an irrigation
well, the Project will provide a temporary water source to sustain livestock while a new permanent water
supply well is constructed. The Project will not provide temporary water sources for crops but would
compensate landowners for any losses in crops resulting from irrigation system damage.

Public Comment: There will be removal of stream buffers within the Jordan Watershed.

Project Response: Although Jordan Lake is located approximately 25 miles southeast of the southern
extent of the Southgate Project, the Project crosses the Jordan Lake riparian buffer zone watershed
(Jordan Lake watershed) for a total of approximately 24 miles in Rockingham (4 miles) and Alamance
(20 miles) counties. The impacts associated with the Project within the riparian buffer zones that are
part of the buffer authorization request are classified as either “Allowable” or “Allowable with mitigation”
uses for non-electric, utility line projects per the Jordan Lake watershed buffer rules (15A NCAC 02B
.0267). Therefore, the Project is seeking a buffer authorization for construction and operation-related
impacts within the Zone One and Zone Two buffers associated with jurisdictional waterbodies. Riparian
buffers impacted during construction will be fully restored, and the Project will mitigate for impacts to
forested buffers in accordance with regulatory requirements.

Specific conditions associated with Footnotes 1 and 4 for non-perpendicular crossings of riparian buffers
by “Utility, non-electric” projects are detailed in the table below, along with whether the project can meet
the condition, and whether a variance for the condition is being requested.

Condition of the Jordan Lake Buffer Rules for non-
perpendicular crossings of riparian buffers by Utility Non-
Electric Corridors
Project
compliance
Variance
Requested
Footnote 1
No heavy equipment is used in Zone One No Yes
Vegetation in undisturbed portions of the buffer is not
compromised Yes No
Felled trees are removed by chain No Yes
No permanent felling of trees occurs in protected buffers or
streams No Yes
Stumps are removed only by grinding No Yes
At the completion of the project the disturbed area is stabilized
with native vegetation Yes No
Zones one and two meet the requirements of Sub-Items (7) and
(8) of this Rule Yes No
Condition of the Jordan Lake Buffer Rules for non-
perpendicular crossings of riparian buffers by Utility Non-
Electric Corridors
Project
compliance
Variance
Requested
Footnote 4
Woody vegetation shall be cleared by hand. No land grubbing
or grading is allowed No Yes
Vegetative root systems shall be left intact to maintain the
integrity of the soil. Stumps shall
remain, except in the trench where trees are cut
No Yes
Underground cables shall be installed by vibratory plow or
trenching Yes No
The trench shall be backfilled with the excavated soil material
immediately following cable installation Yes No
No fertilizer shall be used other than a one-time application to
re-establish vegetation No Yes
Construction activities shall minimize the removal of woody
vegetation, the extent of the disturbed area, and the time in
which areas remain in a disturbed state
Yes No
Measures shall be taken upon completion of construction and
during routine maintenance to ensure diffuse flow of
stormwater through the buffer
Yes No
In wetlands, mats shall be utilized to minimize soil disturbance No Yes

The variance for the Jordan lake buffer rules is required solely due to the inability to comply with footnotes
#1 and #4. Any non-electric utility project would have similar constraints regardless of being a natural
gas line, sewer line or water line.

Public Comment: There will be numerous sediment and erosion control violations just like
the Mountain Valley Pipeline in Virginia.

The Mountain Valley Project (MVP) project in Virginia experienced unique and compounding challenges
that are not reflective of expected conditions on this Project. First, MVP traverses much more challenging
mountainous terrain than is found along this Project’s comparatively flatter right-of-way. Second, the bulk
of the alleged sedimentation issues occurred during construction activities in 2018—a period during
which the MVP project area experienced unprecedented number of high-intensity storms and record
rainfall totals. Third, the orderly construction of the MVP project has been interrupted by a series of legal
challenges. The concerns addressed in these comments are largely attributable to a combination of start-
stop construction in mountainous terrain during a period of record precipitation.

The MVP Southgate Project is separate and distinct from the MVP project in Virginia. It crosses different
terrain and has been designed accordingly. Mountain Valley has developed a Project-specific erosion
and sedimentation control (E&SC) plan based on North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
(NCDEQ) standards as well as lessons learned from construction of the MVP mainline project. The
Project will be constructed in accordance with this plan as well as other applicable federal and state
regulatory approvals. Environmental inspectors will be performing daily inspections of the active right-
of-way to ensure that the E&SC are properly maintained and any necessary adjustments are made to
meet the changing conditions. Additionally, the FERC will be conducting regular compliance inspections
throughout the construction and restoration phases of work. While the Project cannot predict weather
patterns and precipitation events, the implementation of the approved E&SC measures will minimize the
potential for sediment and erosion violations during construction.

Public Comment: An inadvertent release is possible along one of the proposed horizontal
direction drills (HDDs) and would impact the water quality.

Project Response: A geotechnical analysis of the proposed HDD site at the Dan River and Stony Creek
was conducted to confirm that the installation of the pipeline would occur with high success.
Additionally, the Project developed a stringent Horizontal Directional Drill (“HDD”) Contingency Plan in
the unlikely event of an inadvertent release. The HDD process will involve the use primarily of
bentonite clay and any additives will be pre-approved by the FERC and DEQ prior to implementation.
These additives will meet the same standards as those used for drilling drinking water wells, which are
NSF International/American National Standards Institute (NSF/ANSI) 60 Drinking Water Treatment
Chemicals – Health Effects compliant. The drill will be monitored for annular/down-hole pressures to
minimize returns to surface. The HDD Contingency Plan was provided as Appendix I of the JPA.

Public Comment: Natural gas pipelines and compressor stations are dangerous and can
explode.

Project Response: More than 35,000 miles of natural gas pipelines currently operate in North Carolina.
Underground pipeline systems, such as the proposed MVP Southgate project, are recognized by the
federal government as the safest means for transporting fuel. The Project is committed to safety,
protecting the environment, preventing accidents/incidents, and maintaining the highest standards for its
pipeline operation and maintenance. The Project will accomplish this goal through routine preventative
maintenance, pipeline patrols, detailed emergency response plans and a strong pipeline integrity
management program. The Project will establish and maintain strict construction, operation, and
maintenance policies and procedures that will be audited periodically by the Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Association (PHMSA) and to ensure compliance with 49 CFR Part 192. These safety
measures will continue indefinitely for as long as the compressor stations are operational.

It should be noted that during pipeline construction, appropriate care will be taken in residential and
commercial areas to minimize neighborhood and traffic disruption, to control noise and dust to the extent
practicable, and to protect the public at large. Measures to be implemented where the pipeline is near
residential areas include, but are not limited to: fencing the construction work area boundary to ensure
construction equipment, materials, and spoil remain in the construction right-of-way; ensuring the pipe is
installed as quickly as reasonably and safely possible consistent with prudent pipeline construction
practices to minimize construction time affecting a neighborhood; installation of temporary pipeline end
caps at the end of each work day in residential areas; backfilling the trench as soon as possible after the
pipe is laid; covering the open trench of road crossing work areas with temporary steel plates; and
completing cleanup and installation of permanent erosion control measures as soon as reasonable,
weather conditions permitting. The work will be accomplished to enable emergency vehicles to pass at
all times and to limit disruption of access to residential driveways. The Southgate Project has developed
site-specific residential construction plans in areas where occupied residential dwellings are within
50 feet of construction.

If an emergency shutdown or operational equipment testing occurs, some minor venting may occur at
controlled points at mainline valves. The Project’s Operating Procedures are developed, tested and
continuously improved to protect the employees performing the work and the local public from any
potential health risks.

Lastly, while pipeline and compressor station safety are very important issues, they are subject to
regulation by federal agencies, FERC and PHMSA, acting within the scope of their expertise and
jurisdiction. The concerns asserted in these comments are not germane to the protection of water quality.

Public Comment: The water supply of the Stoney Creek Reservoir could be impacted thus
affecting the water supply for more than 50,000 people.

Project Response: The Project is aware of the sensitive nature of the Stoney Creek Reservoir, and the
appropriate caution will be taken both during construction and future operation of the pipeline in this area.
Stringent pipeline design, construction, and safety measures will be in place during construction and
operation of the pipeline to prevent any surface water contamination within or near any waterbody. The
Project has prepared and filed a Water Resources Identification and Testing Plan to document pre-
construction (baseline) and post-construction water quality and quantity of privately-owned water supply
systems to the FERC. In this Plan, the Project states that it will contact and discuss with public water
suppliers and address specific concerns. The Project is completing water supply contingency planning
efforts for public suppliers that have a surface water intake within three miles down gradient of a pipeline
water body crossing. The Project will communicate directly with the public suppliers and work directly
with specific suppliers on contingency testing.

FERC also has fully considered potential impacts to the Stoney Creek Reservoir in the FERC’s July 2019
Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Mountain Valley completed the geotechnical studies and revised
feasibility and hydraulic fracturing analyses for its crossing of the reservoir. Revised HDD drawings with
geotechnical data were included in the December EIR response to the FERC along with a public version
of all of geotechnical reports.

Public Comment: Natural-gas extraction and transport just continues the use of fossil fuels
and resulting greenhouse gases, which in turn affect climate change. Renewable energy (e.g.,
solar, wind) could be used instead.

Project Response: Renewable energy sources are increasing in capacity and benefit the energy market
by diversifying the fuels used to generate electricity. However, the availability of these sources is
intermittent, and as such they are not interchangeable with a steady supply of natural gas and cannot
meet current or forecasted energy needs. Further, renewable energy sources cannot meet the specific
objectives of the Project to provide natural gas for typical local distribution uses (e.g., home heating,
cooking, industrial uses). In addition, renewable energy does not meet the purpose of the Project to
provide new natural gas transmission pipeline capacity that will enhance the reliability, market
competition, and resiliency of the existing pipeline infrastructure in North Carolina.

-----

In closing, we recognize that there were numerous comments from NCDEQ about the DEIS. These
comments were addressed in an October 21, 2019 letter response to Ms. Sheila Holman at the NCDEQ.
Each comment from the NCDEQ was specifically addressed in Attachment 2 of the October 21st, 2019
response. Additional information was provided under separate cover with the Joint Permit Application,
on October 31st, 2019.

Mountain Valley appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments in support of its application for
a Joint Permit. Should you have any additional questions or need further information to complete your
review, please do not hesitate to contact Alex Miller at 713-374-1599 or via email at
[e-mail] or myself at 561-691-7054 or via email at
[e-mail]. Thank you for your continued consideration.

Sincerely,
Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC

Kathy Salvador
Senior Director, Environmental Services

CC: Alex Miller, MVP
Travis Faul, MVP
Heather Patti, TRC
Kevin Martin, S&EC